Bravo, Chief Rabbi Mirvis! Courage, Dayan Ehrentreu!

Limmud and the Orthodox Fiasco

Courage is the word that comes to mind when we think of Britain’s new Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis’ decision to come to Limmud, the largest Jewish conference in the world, which will take place in England at the end of the year. It is a sad commentary on the state of contemporary Orthodox leadership when a chief rabbi is called courageous because he accepts the invitation to teach Torah at such a remarkable Jewish event. What could be more obvious? But the truth is that courage has indeed become a rare commodity in large segments of Orthodoxy.

The letter written by the venerable Dayan Ehrentreu, former Rosh Beit Din of the United Synagogue, as well as some other leading British dayanim and rabbis, calling on fellow Jews not to participate in the upcoming Limmud conference in England because spokesmen of the Reform and Conservative movements will alsobe present, is most telling. It has once again thrown British Jewry into a fierce, highly publicized, and embarrassing confrontation.

Religious condemnation in the form of bans and harshly written edicts is the worst action these eminent rabbis can take. It displays symptoms of fear, helplessness and miscalculation. It reflects fundamentalism and dogmatism. Bans such as these are identified with those issued by the Christian clerical authorities who condemned Galileo in the seventeenth century for suggesting that the earth was not at the center of the universe. Bans have been used against demons, witches and other forms of superstition—hardly activities these rabbis want to be associated with.

It is a sad state of affairs when rabbis believe they can still hide behind high-walled citadels of exclusiveness. More than that, it indicates a total disconnect from reality. Today, we communicate with one another in unprecedented ways. The rules of waging an ideological war have drastically changed, just as the overall situation of the Jewish people has. What once worked is now nothing more than a farce. While a large part of the Orthodox world continues to believe that there is no need for change, the truth is that there is almost nothing more misleading and dangerous than that belief.

Cracks in the walls of Orthodox strongholds are everywhere around us—the higher the walls, the larger the cracks—and by no artificial process can they be mended again. To believe otherwise is nothing more than wishful thinking.

The fact that Orthodox rabbis stay away from conferences such as Limmud is downright embarrassing to all of us Orthodox teachers. The hopelessness of thinking that anyone will be convinced of the truth of Orthodox belief when its educators stay away because teachers from other movements participate has gone beyond the point of debatable. Such ideas have faded into flickering embers that have lost all meaning. All it does is convince people that Orthodox Jews are afraid of any confrontation with those who think differently. It turns Orthodox Judaism into a laughing stock and convinces intelligent young Jews that it is an outmoded form of Judaism, which no longer has anything to offer and is driven by nothing but fear.

It inexplicably does not occur to these rabbis that by staying away they hand Limmud over on a silver platter to the non-Orthodox denominations, strengthening these very movements. One wonders why they don’t see what is crystal clear to everybody else. The enormous damage done by not having Orthodox teachers participating cannot be emphasized enough. Who of the distinguished dayanim and rabbis have the right to deny the participants of Limmud the opportunity to hear the Orthodox point of view? How do they dare to stay away?

Arguments that it is a matter of principle not to participate because it will give credibility to non-Orthodox denominations are completely unfounded, since Limmud does not give credence to anybody and is nothing more than a market place where people try to sell their goods. Deciding not to attend is like deliberately closing one’s business on the Internet and going bankrupt because competing businesses have the chutzpah to use the Internet as well.

Indeed, isn’t fear of the Conservative and Reform movements the real reason for the rabbis’ refusal to participate? Too many Orthodox rabbis have no knowledge about these denominations. They don’t study their arguments, read their literature or even speak to those who stand for these ideas. They’re afraid of these movements because they don’t know how to refute them. When they are asked by Limmud participants why they don’t agree with these denominations and why Orthodoxy is the right path, they are at a loss for words. Their principle seems to be similar to that of the person who reviewed a book but refused to read it first because it would prejudice him too much. Arguments today used against Reform and Conservative ideas are often outmoded clichés. Many rabbis are not even aware that major positive changes have taken place within these groups. Neither do they seem to be aware that Orthodoxy itself is constantly reformulating its ideology so that it can meet the new and daunting challenges that modernity heaps upon our Jewish and non-Jewish societies.

Would it not be possible to show a bit of humility and actually listen to some of the opponents’ arguments? Reform and Conservative Judaism, in many ways but not solely, resulted from Orthodoxy’s failure to read the religious map correctly. There is much evidence supporting the claim that some delicate religious souls were searching for a Judaism that was committed to Halacha but not authoritarian, and Orthodoxy failed to deliver. Would some modesty not be appropriate here? Is Orthodoxy always right, and can it actually claim that it has the truth and nothing but the truth? Is absolute theological certainty indeed the hallmark of Orthodoxy? Anybody who studies the primary religious texts of Judaism knows better. To a great extent, authentic Judaism consisted of a multitude of seriously competing ideas, and while simultaneously not compromising Halacha there was a full awareness among the Sages that even Halacha was open to many opinions.

The enormous loss of prestige that Orthodoxy has suffered over the last hundred years, due to its failure to understand what was happening with the spiritual condition of our people, is beyond description. It has still not realized that it is nothing short of a miracle that so many young, intelligent Jews became or even remained Orthodox despite what Orthodoxy had to offer. Most of the time, it was possible only because some Orthodox individuals, thinkers and leaders went their own way and, just like the Baal Shem Tov, realized that mainstream Orthodoxy got it terribly wrong. The outcome of the constant war waged by conventional Orthodoxy against these new ideas and new directions was predictable. It capitulated, leaving behind lots of fatalities.

Real Orthodoxy has nothing to fear. It has all the vital ingredients necessary to enter the battlegrounds and show its worth. Judaism is the most astonishing and daring religion with which the world has been blessed. It has infinite courage, standing head and shoulders above everything else. It dares, and never avoids any obstacle or critique. It enjoys a good fight so that it can enrich itself. It is a protest movement against many “isms,” but above all against small-mindedness.

I call on Dayan Ehrentreu, who is not only a great scholar but also an outstanding orator, to come to Limmud. Instead of criticizing Chief Rabbi Mirvis, he should compliment him for his courage and ask Emeritus Chief Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks to join him, abandoning his former practice of stopping him from going to Limmud. I encourage the Dayan to sit on panels with Reform and Conservative rabbis and thinkers and carefully listen to what they have to say, take advice from them and, if necessary, prove them wrong. He should invite them to join him in the struggle to ensure that young Jews fall in love with Judaism and become convinced of the beauty of Orthodoxy.

Judaism is on the decline in many parts of the world, and we have to do everything in our power to turn the tide. What is necessary is creative thinking and bold ideas. Scaring people away from Limmud is the last thing we need. It’s a sign of cowardice. If Orthodoxy is unable to educate its followers to withstand other ideologies, it is guilty of an educational fiasco.

Dear Dayan Ehrentreu, do not spend your energy on denunciations and censorship. Show us that real Orthodoxy is unbeatable. That’s what we are all waiting for: Orthodox courage.

Share this:

About Nathan Lopes Cardozo

Rabbi Dr. Nathan Lopes Cardozo is the Founder and Dean of the David Cardozo Academy and the Bet Midrash of Avraham Avinu in Jerusalem. A sought-after lecturer on the international stage for both Jewish and non-Jewish audiences, Rabbi Cardozo is the author of 13 books and numerous articles in both English and Hebrew. He heads a Think Tank focused on finding new Halachic and philosophical approaches to dealing with the crisis of religion and identity amongst Jews and the Jewish State of Israel. Hailing from the Netherlands, Rabbi Cardozo is known for his original and often fearlessly controversial insights into Judaism. His ideas are widely debated on an international level on social media, blogs, books and other forums.

Every week I receive hundreds of emails, as well as a host of important observations on my essays, via our website, Facebook, newspaper blogs, and other media outlets. It is therefore completely impossible for me to respond – for which I apologize – but please be assured that I read every comment, which I deeply appreciate and from which I learn so much. Only in exceptional cases will I respond in a subsequent essay. My office staff will try to be more prompt in posting these remarks on our website.

Thank you very much for taking the time to share your comments with me, as well as with your fellow readers. I hope you will continue to do so.

Nathan Lopes Cardozo

Comments

“Limmud … is nothing more than a market place where people try to sell their goods”
I was under the impression that this idea is part of what the Dayan was fighting against. Maybe he holds תורה is not a סחורה, but אמת?

I believe his father taught in R. Breuer’s “Torahlehranstalt” (=Yeshivah) in pre-war Frankfurt. The Dayan might simply be following the “Austritt” approach of R. Samson Raphael Hirsch.
Extrapolating e.g. from R. Hirsch’s Sivan-essay “On the uniqueness of Torah” (Coll. Writings, Vol I, p 183ff), he might not have liked the market place idea either.

I full agree that Torah is no merchandise and surely the emeth but than we have to make sure that as many Jews will be influenced by it. By staying away we deny many Jews that opportunity. While the Austrits idea may have worked in the days of Rabbiner Hirsch, it definitely does not work today. Times have radically changed. Even in the days of Rabbiner Hirsch it was the famous Rabbiner Bamberger who opposed it by all means.

Secondly if the Dayan opposes Limmud he should write a profound critique on the Conservative and Reform movement, taking their theories apart, so as to show that he is not afraid of their claims. Not writing this and not going to Limmud is the worst one can do.

This essay is the finest that you have ever written by a country mile! You have totally hit the whole argument and all the attendant issues squarely on the head in my opinion and have completely blown this commentator, (me) away.

Kol Hakavod! on an essay that begged to be written; on the basis of this I will do my utmost to attend Limmud this year and hear as many of your talks as I’m able to, your words and thoughts truly inspire me & I could end up being one of your greatest fans.

I do hope that you will also be able to make it to our shul over Shavuot too.

Which part of the limmud conference is embarassing for the the rabbonim to attend? The multitude of gay lesbian gay marriage and other topics completely beyond the pale or if u prefer the hostile anti- israel new left j street version.torah values at limmud you must be kidding.how dare you personally name the one man who has given thirty years of his life building torah supporting communities and institutions with a gold standard our three hundred years of united synagogue can be proud of. To paint him in the light you did is a lie,disingenuous,hateful,spiteful and conduct unbecoming of you.

It seems to me that arguments about engaging non-Orthodox groups are a non-starter in the frum world because of the long-standing psak by many Rabbonim 50-60 years ago that doing so gives credence to non-Orthodox “movements” in the eyes of other Jews. My understanding is that the psak at the time not to join multi-denominational groups was specifically on that basis.

A true gadol (if any exist today) needs to look clearly at the question of whether the result of engagement with non-Orthodox groups still has that effect in any way, or if, as I fear, the lack of engagement by Orthodox Rabbonim has the effect of diminishing Orthodox Judaism in the eyes of non-Orthodox Jews and in the eyes of the questioners among Orthodoxy.

To put it another way, the psak not to engage in multi-denominational groups is not a gzeira about which we can debate batla ta’ama eino batla gzeira. It’s a psak by modern-day Rabbonim that was predicated on an understanding of the consequences of actions. Let’s take as a premise that those Rabbonim were correct at that time. Does it mean that the Jewish world, and the consequences of actions in that Jewish world, is the same now? The Jewish world is clearly not the same – the Jews that are affiliated with, or considering, non-Orthodox movements now are vastly different in religious background than those who were affiliated with or considering non-Orthodox movements then.

Measuring this change and considering its effects requires greater minds and broader shoulders than mine. But it is a question that must be considered.

Too often, arguments that others are not able to present themselves properly devolve- as we see in this very piece- into arguments that they aren’t making the *correct* arguments, which, in turn simply mean that they are not making the arguments the author would prefer (i.e., his arguments). This is, of course, a logical fallacy, not to mention something that smacks of messianism.

I should also point out that if, indeed, Orthodox rabbis do not present arguments in Orthodoxy’s favor at Limmud, it is probably a confluence of factors: That we live in an age that frowns on objective arguments, that conservative-minded thinkers are cowed into submission by “correct” thinkers, that the type of people who present at Limmud are probably those least inclined to make any sort of absolute, “offensive” arguments, etc. etc.

So, in short, R’ Cardozo: Can you tell us why Orthodoxy is the correct path?

Thanks. However you read in my words something which is not there. As I mentioned in the essay, orthodoxy should not be so arrogant to claim that is has all the truth. There is much to learn from the Conservative and Reform. Indeed there are no objective arguments. But orthodoxy can definitely put forward a good argument for its position. And so can Reform and Conservative. But surely it is subjective. Personally I do not believe so much in these arguments but I can’t deny that they could make sense when they are well presented. So why should they not be stated at Limmud?

I do think that it is very important not to give the R/C any shred of a feeling of legitimacy; but it takes a very special person to be able to come to an event such as the Limmud without giving that impression, while still clearly having Ahavat Yisrael and loving all of his fellow Jews. It’s just a very difficult thing to do, and it’s better not done at all than badly done.

Regarding edicts in general, I do find them effective- right now, because so many Jews in Western countries are becoming so lax in their observance, it’s quite possible that we need more wise edicts. For example, the edict against yayn stam is so wise and effective that we hold the wine up during the seder and sing “vehi sheamda”- “this is what stood for us”. The wine.

Rav Lopes Cardozo, I just finished watching the video of you that was recorded for JDOV (Johann Sebastian Bach, Judaism and the Art of Being a Rebel). Those twelve minutes have impacted me deeply. I noticed your note at the bottom of your transcript, so I thought I would read TTP-364 one more time. It was most encouraging to read your response in the comments:
“Secondly if the Dayan opposes Limmud he should write a profound critique on the Conservative and Reform movement, taking their theories apart, so as to show that he is not afraid of their claims.”

I agree wholeheartedly that courage is what is required. For too long now Rabonim have tip-toed around the issue. It is high time we stand tall and confront the minim with emeth. Indeed, we need our strongest and wisest Torah warriors to be the first to challenge these “movements.” There are many sincere Jews that have no knowledge of what authentic Judaism offers and they have been trapped, sometimes for generations, by the minim that pretend to be their leaders. They have never seen true Torah warriors. They are thirsty and we should learn a lesson from our mothers and offer them mayim. How dare we be so bold as to be stingy for those thirsty for Torah. Abraham abinu would be the first to go if he were with us now.

Trackbacks

[…] British chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis unleashed a furious debate when he announced his participation in this year’s Limmud conference. While some were against his participation, others offered compelling reasons why this step is long over due, including Rabbi Nathan Lopez Cardozo. […]

Subscribe to Thoughts to Ponder

The David Cardozo Academy seeks to revitalize the Jewish tradition and restore the relevance of Judaism as a force of authentic, non-dogmatic Jewish religiosity in which Jews once more take pride in the divine Torah and its great moral and spiritual mission towards all of mankind.

From the DCA Think Tank

We're delighted to share with you a full-color bulletin with photos detailing what the David Cardozo Academy Think Tank has been up to this year - our regular activities plus an Open Think Tank for the public in March. There are also questions for you to ponder - it wouldn't be the DCA Think Tank without them! Read more →

Think Tank Blogs

Spiritual experiences may represent our yearning for the “infinite”, but this yearning can only find expression in seeking to improve ourselves to the best of our ability and seeking to relate with love to the people and the world around us, while at the same time coming to an acceptance of our finiteness and separateness, overcoming the grief and outrage we feel at not being everything. Yearning for the infinite is really a way of learning how to be finite. Read more →